Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Are you playing stupid?They are obligations to the taxpayers. Do you understand what that means?Worthless? Like US Treasuries?
U.S. treasuries are an obligation to the taxpayer, and so are the I.O.U.s in the socalled SS trust fund.
We agree. Rock solid securities. The opposite of worthless.
That means I don't have to worry that my T-Notes will fail to pay my interest or return my principal.
If you wrote an IOU to yourself and stuck it in your pocket, how much money could you get from what you have in your pocket?
When the government issues a security to itself, how much has it increased the assets of the government?Agreed, but like other US treasuries they are far from being worthless.Worthless? Like US Treasuries?
U.S. treasuries are an obligation to the taxpayer, and so are the I.O.U.s in the socalled SS trust fund.
Wrong. All government securities are obligations to the taxpayers. They are debts, not assets.
All government securities are obligations to the taxpayers.
Yup.
They are debts, not assets.
They're debts and assets.
Fair enough. Doesn't change the fact that it's a wealth re-distribution program that's run inefficiently and is the one of the main drivers of our national debt.As you know, the Social Security System is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Over the next five years, the Social Security trust fund could encounter deficits of up to $111 billion, and in the decades ahead its unfunded obligations could run well into the trillions.
That was Reagan, 35+ years ago.
NOPE, that's false.
SS is operationally VERY efficient with overhead at just 0.7% compared to about 8-10% if you look at any private insurance system.
SS trust fund balance is positive, which means public has paid more into the system than was paid out of it. And the reason why if nothing is done it will turn negative has nothing to do with inefficiency it has to do with there being more retired people that need to be covered.
that would be true if the dems in congress had not merged SS funds with the general fund under LBJ. Now, those working pay for those who are retired. There is no "fund" that was made up from our SS (FICA) deductions.
Are you playing stupid?They are obligations to the taxpayers. Do you understand what that means?U.S. treasuries are an obligation to the taxpayer, and so are the I.O.U.s in the socalled SS trust fund.
We agree. Rock solid securities. The opposite of worthless.
That means I don't have to worry that my T-Notes will fail to pay my interest or return my principal.
If you wrote an IOU to yourself and stuck it in your pocket, how much money could you get from what you have in your pocket?
If you wrote an IOU to yourself and stuck it in your pocket, how much money could you get from what you have in your pocket?
I'll wait for you to explain what the hell that has to do with US Treasury debt securities being rock solid......
Exactly. The net change is $0.00. Zero, zip, nada, nothing. That's how much the Trust Fund is worth.When the government issues a security to itself, how much has it increased the assets of the government?Agreed, but like other US treasuries they are far from being worthless.U.S. treasuries are an obligation to the taxpayer, and so are the I.O.U.s in the socalled SS trust fund.
Wrong. All government securities are obligations to the taxpayers. They are debts, not assets.
All government securities are obligations to the taxpayers.
Yup.
They are debts, not assets.
They're debts and assets.
When the government issues a security to itself, how much has it increased the assets of the government?
By exactly the same amount it has increased the liabilities of the government.
[
They were forced several times to buy higher cost construction to lessen damage due to earthquakes which was a lot more expense, had no estimated payback, and was met with more opposition than adding solar panels.
That is a SAFETY issue, in which most building codes are based. Solar panels don't make you more safe. Also watch, the utilities have already raised rates on solar panel users, and they will continue to go up, and up until there is no real cost benefit to having them.
I doubt that as rates were not raised, in several locales a service charge was added because solar panel users don't generate the income to help maintain the power grid so the compromise was a modest small monthly fee. If the utility companies attempt to gouge those with solar panels then regulatory agencies most likely will jump in as any fees have to be approved by them.
As the cost of electricity goes up, free will still be free for those with solar.
Californians see global climate change as a danger and the majority say we can see the effects now.[
They were forced several times to buy higher cost construction to lessen damage due to earthquakes which was a lot more expense, had no estimated payback, and was met with more opposition than adding solar panels.
That is a SAFETY issue, in which most building codes are based. Solar panels don't make you more safe. Also watch, the utilities have already raised rates on solar panel users, and they will continue to go up, and up until there is no real cost benefit to having them.
Four in five Californians say global warming is a serious threat to the state’s future.
Californians' Views on Climate Change - Public Policy Institute of California
New Poll: Overwhelming Support For Rooftop Solar Power And Related Policies Among California Voters
Fair enough. Doesn't change the fact that it's a wealth re-distribution program that's run inefficiently and is the one of the main drivers of our national debt.As you know, the Social Security System is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Over the next five years, the Social Security trust fund could encounter deficits of up to $111 billion, and in the decades ahead its unfunded obligations could run well into the trillions.
That was Reagan, 35+ years ago.
NOPE, that's false.
SS is operationally VERY efficient with overhead at just 0.7% compared to about 8-10% if you look at any private insurance system.
SS trust fund balance is positive, which means public has paid more into the system than was paid out of it. And the reason why if nothing is done it will turn negative has nothing to do with inefficiency it has to do with there being more retired people that need to be covered.
that would be true if the dems in congress had not merged SS funds with the general fund under LBJ. Now, those working pay for those who are retired. There is no "fund" that was made up from our SS (FICA) deductions.
I don't know where this fiction is coming from, but I've heard it a dozen times.
Social Security has operated in the exact same way, since it was created. LBJ did not change anything.
I don't know where you got this idea from, but someone lied to you. LBJ changed....> NOTHING < about how the program works.
Under FDR, current tax payers, were paying for current retirees. All surplus funds were spent by the Federal Government.
From FDR, until today... the system has not changed in those areas. Current tax payers, pay for current retirees. Surplus funds are spent by the Federal Government.
Nothing has changed in those areas, since the Social Security Program was created.
If you doubt that, you can go read the history of the Social Security program on the Social Security web site. It is accurate.
Installing solar panels where it rains 200 days a year defines "dense."My grand kids in Washington State are looking forward to the warm sunny days in winter.Retirement is going to be much warmer and wetter than people had once thought. Even if we are able to turn this around and I have serious doubts at this point we are going to see more adverse affects in the coming years.
But hey, how many generations get to witness the extinction of their species?
Washington state? Doesn't it rain like 200 days out of the year there?
WOW are you dense.
For starters you clearly misunderstood the post and you doubled down on that fact.
But since you brought it up, yes solar does work in Seattle, obviously you didn't look into that either before posting did you?
[
They were forced several times to buy higher cost construction to lessen damage due to earthquakes which was a lot more expense, had no estimated payback, and was met with more opposition than adding solar panels.
That is a SAFETY issue, in which most building codes are based. Solar panels don't make you more safe. Also watch, the utilities have already raised rates on solar panel users, and they will continue to go up, and up until there is no real cost benefit to having them.
I doubt that as rates were not raised, in several locales a service charge was added because solar panel users don't generate the income to help maintain the power grid so the compromise was a modest small monthly fee. If the utility companies attempt to gouge those with solar panels then regulatory agencies most likely will jump in as any fees have to be approved by them.
As the cost of electricity goes up, free will still be free for those with solar.
You consider an initial cost of $70,000 free? Amazing to me. Perhaps to you, but to me, that's a lot of money.
Currently there is zero in the SS fund and those working are paying those who are retired.
Currently there is about $2.8 trillion in the SS Trust Fund.
True, there is about $2.8 Trillion in the account of Social Security but there is no trust fund.
We have a massive unfunded liability.
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time
True, there is about $2.8 Trillion in the account of Social Security but there is no trust fund.
So where is the $2.8 trillion?
Are you playing stupid?They are obligations to the taxpayers. Do you understand what that means?We agree. Rock solid securities. The opposite of worthless.
That means I don't have to worry that my T-Notes will fail to pay my interest or return my principal.
If you wrote an IOU to yourself and stuck it in your pocket, how much money could you get from what you have in your pocket?
If you wrote an IOU to yourself and stuck it in your pocket, how much money could you get from what you have in your pocket?
I'll wait for you to explain what the hell that has to do with US Treasury debt securities being rock solid......
They are "rock solid" only because the government can point guns at me and you to extract the money from our wallets. Of what value is that to me?
How long are you going to keep playing stupid?
[
They were forced several times to buy higher cost construction to lessen damage due to earthquakes which was a lot more expense, had no estimated payback, and was met with more opposition than adding solar panels.
That is a SAFETY issue, in which most building codes are based. Solar panels don't make you more safe. Also watch, the utilities have already raised rates on solar panel users, and they will continue to go up, and up until there is no real cost benefit to having them.
I doubt that as rates were not raised, in several locales a service charge was added because solar panel users don't generate the income to help maintain the power grid so the compromise was a modest small monthly fee. If the utility companies attempt to gouge those with solar panels then regulatory agencies most likely will jump in as any fees have to be approved by them.
As the cost of electricity goes up, free will still be free for those with solar.
You consider an initial cost of $70,000 free? Amazing to me. Perhaps to you, but to me, that's a lot of money.
A lot of conservatives in this forum seem to have a mental block when it comes to Social Security. They just an't admit that it's a huge swindel.Are you playing stupid?They are obligations to the taxpayers. Do you understand what that means?
That means I don't have to worry that my T-Notes will fail to pay my interest or return my principal.
If you wrote an IOU to yourself and stuck it in your pocket, how much money could you get from what you have in your pocket?
If you wrote an IOU to yourself and stuck it in your pocket, how much money could you get from what you have in your pocket?
I'll wait for you to explain what the hell that has to do with US Treasury debt securities being rock solid......
They are "rock solid" only because the government can point guns at me and you to extract the money from our wallets. Of what value is that to me?
How long are you going to keep playing stupid?
Who said he's playing?
Installing solar panels where it rains 200 days a year defines "dense."My grand kids in Washington State are looking forward to the warm sunny days in winter.
Washington state? Doesn't it rain like 200 days out of the year there?
WOW are you dense.
For starters you clearly misunderstood the post and you doubled down on that fact.
But since you brought it up, yes solar does work in Seattle, obviously you didn't look into that either before posting did you?
"Works", perhaps yes. Efficiently? Not at all. Other than the fact that temperatures are far lower than, say my area of North Florida where it is still extremely unpopular.
A lot of conservatives in this forum seem to have a mental block when it comes to Social Security. They just an't admit that it's a huge swindel.Are you playing stupid?That means I don't have to worry that my T-Notes will fail to pay my interest or return my principal.
If you wrote an IOU to yourself and stuck it in your pocket, how much money could you get from what you have in your pocket?
If you wrote an IOU to yourself and stuck it in your pocket, how much money could you get from what you have in your pocket?
I'll wait for you to explain what the hell that has to do with US Treasury debt securities being rock solid......
They are "rock solid" only because the government can point guns at me and you to extract the money from our wallets. Of what value is that to me?
How long are you going to keep playing stupid?
Who said he's playing?
Installing solar panels where it rains 200 days a year defines "dense."Washington state? Doesn't it rain like 200 days out of the year there?
WOW are you dense.
For starters you clearly misunderstood the post and you doubled down on that fact.
But since you brought it up, yes solar does work in Seattle, obviously you didn't look into that either before posting did you?
"Works", perhaps yes. Efficiently? Not at all. Other than the fact that temperatures are far lower than, say my area of North Florida where it is still extremely unpopular.
Here is an IKEA in Washington with a solar roof
It's viable and now some solar panels work best in defused light so they are more productive on cloudy days.
I'm sorry solar is 'extremely' unpopular in North Florida but that's kind of the shitty part of the state anyway.
The fact that IKEA put it on their roof proves nothing. You have no idea how much the spent or how much power it produces. It could be a big money loser, for all you know.Installing solar panels where it rains 200 days a year defines "dense."Washington state? Doesn't it rain like 200 days out of the year there?
WOW are you dense.
For starters you clearly misunderstood the post and you doubled down on that fact.
But since you brought it up, yes solar does work in Seattle, obviously you didn't look into that either before posting did you?
"Works", perhaps yes. Efficiently? Not at all. Other than the fact that temperatures are far lower than, say my area of North Florida where it is still extremely unpopular.
Here is an IKEA in Washington with a solar roof
It's viable and now some solar panels work best in defused light so they are more productive on cloudy days.
I'm sorry solar is 'extremely' unpopular in North Florida but that's kind of the shitty part of the state anyway.
Stop saying flat out bullshit.
For 70k you are powering a sprawling mansion.
